linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: MADV_WILLNEED implementation for anonymous memory

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 31 Jan 2008 05:52:09 -0500
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, hugh@...itas.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, npiggin@...e.de,
	mztabzr@...inter.de, mpm@...enic.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: MADV_WILLNEED implementation for anonymous memory

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:06:10 +0100
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:

> > Yeah, the 2.5 switch to physical scanning killed us there.
> > 
> > I still don't know why my
> > allocate-swapspace-according-to-virtual-address change didn't
> > help.  Much.  Marcelo played with that a bit too.
> 
> I've been thinking about just always doing swap on > page clusters. 
> Any reason swapping couldn't be done on e.g. 1MB chunks? 

Don't malloc() and free() hopelessly fragment memory
over time, ensuring that little related data can be
found inside each 1MB chunk if the process is large
enough?  (say, firefox)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/